Comment author: Jesse_L 28 August 2011 06:28:14AM 7 points [-]

$10k for the most efficient instrument of existential risk reduction, the most efficient way to do good.

Comment author: zero_call 27 February 2010 04:01:39AM 5 points [-]

Is it true that people process things so differently? Or is it more of a subtle difference with overblown consequences? Can we change the bounds of the way we perceive?

Comment author: Jesse_L 18 March 2010 02:53:25AM 1 point [-]

My friend thinks in print, usually in the font of whatever she last read. In conversation, she mentally transcribes every word. Not surprisingly, she reads super fast and dislikes homophonic puns.

Comment author: Morendil 17 March 2010 04:38:36PM 1 point [-]

I don't mean that I "feel the right move without reading". I mean that reading, for me, has a tactile rather than visual quality. When I imagine an extra stone on the board I don't see it.

Comment author: Jesse_L 18 March 2010 02:25:54AM *  0 points [-]

Interesting, so there is more than one way to read. Sorry, I had misread your comment.

Comment author: Morendil 01 March 2010 09:18:05AM 7 points [-]

Once I asked a friend of mine, who's a Go player like me, what "reading" felt like to him.

For those who don't know, "reading" is the term in Go for thinking through the consequences of a move before you make the move. There's a saying, "reading is the muscle of Go" - you can improve your play by having good heuristics and by memorizing some fixed patterns of play, but really good play requires being able to consider the state of play N moves ahead (depth), often for M possible variations (breadth).

My friend, it turns out, is a visual thinker. When he "reads" a Go sequence, he literally hallucinates stones in the appropriate positions; he sees them there. (The difficulty for him is to remember the various pictures.) I'm a "verbal thinker". (Actually verbal/kinesthetic.) I can stare at the Go board until my eyes bleed and never hallucinate a damn thing.

I have improved a lot at Go by solving small exercises, "tsumego" as they are called. The interesting thing is that I can now look at some non-trivial problems and instantly "spot" the right sequence (sometimes the correct answer plus several alternatives), but I still don't see a damn thing. The intersections don't light up with an overlay of imagined stones. It's more like I feel where the right answer is.

This is a mild disappointment, because one of the reasons I took up Go in the first place was to improve my visual thinking.

Comment author: Jesse_L 17 March 2010 04:24:53PM *  1 point [-]

Of course your friend hallucinates stones: there's no other way to read, unless you're going to recite "black c4, white e3, ...". The intersections don't light up automatically: they must be "manually" switched on. Even a visual thinker must string words together in order to speak.

With practice you can learn to read. Start with visualizing one move ahead. That's only one extra stone on the board---anyone can learn to imagine that. Then work on imagining two stones...

"Feeling" the right move without reading is a separate skill. Both skills are fundamental to the game.

Comment author: Jesse_L 28 February 2010 10:03:24PM 15 points [-]

Just put $2K to the general fund.